


W^ 



Mm 






m 











iM^M: 



'■^mm^^^. 












-^ j::?^^; 



J>^ 



:> 'S?^ - - 






:> > '::^>^* : 



>:a> 






^^ 






>>2> 






-r^^^ 



fLlBRAEY OF CONGRESS. 

I ^ t\ 

I UNITED STATES OP AMERICA. |j 



A =«S'-^'^^ fe 






J»3> ^ 

1> > ^5> .:_ , 



JH^ 



► .~> . ;. ' .< 


>=3>. > < 








>^^ 2> ^ -^ 


^-^IL^ ^ -1 ~1 


:^. ^ .^' y -^ 




-^ ., ,^ 


y^ -.j>- :> '.-^' 


> .^. 


• . s> 5>: :5 ^ 


► --* ■ ' — -^ 


:.-.-=^ ■:> >"^ 


r^ - '^ 




» "V- 


> ,•" » >"^ ^. -<* 


> .^'.^^ 


->^ ^;. ■) .^-^ 


-■ — ^ 


, V^ '». .^ .'>-^ 


>, ■? I J 


;, :\ : ;5 :3»» 


■ -, •■■^" '_iy 


1 .:^.>> ^.::>> . 


"> .•> :^ 


* .^ ".-^i ^ ^ - 


;,. > '^ 


>>>>-^:^3 


So ;> ■.- 












■3> . 5r~> , :>"-.:>^-?.^5;> 






>. ■•&.;3>.> ■ "x> 






























» 






-^) 1> 









1> ^ 



1?§ 






5 5j> 






->> :.j> > '• '. 



>> - » 



5^^ 



^3 






^S 






^:*' ^ 

^:?» 









:^K^ 



y,, ^ :t>' 

^^3 ^^^^^ ■ 



5^^ 






rjr 



^? 



>^a> 






\X> -J 






^^ > > > ^?-^ 

■ 23> • » > ^^ 

^^ ^3*? 5^ 

2?a i^i?? 



-■ > » '^"'-, ^^ 



;>^ :> 

?> » 



^> ^) -^:^>>^^.-^ . 



S m 



■mm: 



m > 



>3> .^ ^ *2i^?^C'^??> ^:> >:5^ ^^ ^ 






^ 



/vn 



REPORT 



COMMITTEE ON THE LATE DLrEL. 





The Committee appoivted to investgate Ihe ccMses which 
led to the death, of the Hon. Jt5i«//fnn Citley, late a 
memhcr of the House of Jiepresintatives, and the cir- 
CMJiislon-cM conneited thtriicith, and to inquire 
xchtther there has been, in the can ulUtded to, a breach 
of the privileges of the House, and to ichom rrere re- 
ferrtd sundry memori^ds upon the subject, now ask 
leave to submit their 

REPORT: 

In discharging ihe trust committed to them by 
the House of Representatives, the committee have 
endeavored impliciil\' to obey iis order, neither 
stopping sliort, on thp one hand, of the full mea- 
sure of the duty imposed upon them, nor transcend- 
ing its just limits on the other. They were of the 
opinion that the investigation was instituted solely 
for the maintenance of the privileges of the House. 
It was not within the province of the House of Re- 
presentatives to invesi:gate the causes which led to 
the death uf one of its members, or the circum- 
stances which attended it, with a view to the pun- 
ishment of any oQ"ender for a high crime or misde- 
meanor. That belongs, in every case, exclusively 
to the courts of law. Senators and Representatives 
are not privileged from arrest in cjises of " treason, 
felony, and breach of the peace;" and it is a con- 
stitutional provision, that "in all criminal prosecu- 
tions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy 
and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State 
and di5trict wherein the crime shall have been com- 
mitted, which district shall have been previously as- 
certained by law; and to be informed of the nature 
and cause of the accusation; to be confronted by 
the witnesses against him; to have compulsory pro- 
cess for obtaining- witnesses in hiN tavor; and to 
have the assistance ot counsel /or his defence."! 
The inquiry, therefore, is directed to one object I 
only — the maintenance o( the privileges of the 
House; and the question is, what, in that view, 
were the causes which led to the death of Mr. Cil- 
ley, and the circumstances connected therewith, 
and did they involve a breach of those privileges? 

In pursuing this investigation, the Cfimniiitee 
have examined all whose testimony, there was 
reason to believe, niisht be material; and Messrs. 
Graves, Wise, and Jones, members of the House, 
were perm i tied to attend, and to examine and cross- 
examine the witnesses, and the same leave was ex- 
tended to Mr. Menefee, oi the House, and. to Mr. 
Pierce, of the Senate, at their request. The entire 
ffiass of the testimony is now submitted as a part 
of this report. One witness, Daniel Jackson, of 
the city of New York, who was summoned to 
attend, and called upon to testify, has negleclad to 
obey the requisition, though he appeared before the 
committee, and interrogatories were put to him; 
but, from the pcsition in which he stood, and the 
disclosures of another witness, it was not thought 



worth t"e time or aitemion of the House or of the 
committee to notice him further. 

The late Jonathan CHley, a member of the 
House from the Stale of Maine, fell by the hand of 
William J. Graves, a member of the House from 
the State of Kentucky, in a duel fought with rifles, 
near the boundary line between the Disiiict of 
Columbia and the State of -Maryland, on Saturday, 
the 24ih of February last. 

The causes which led to his death are intimately 
eonnerted wiih the prorecaings of this House. On 
the 12ih of February Mr. Wi.-e, of Virginia, pre- 
sented to the House a publication in the iN'ew York 
Courier and Enquirer, charging a member of Con- 
gress with corruption upon the authority of an 
anonymous writer under the signature of "the Spy 
in Washingion;" and thereupon moved a resolu- 
ti(m for the appointment of a select committee, 
with power to send for persons and papers, to 
inquire into the charge. Mr. Wise said: "The 
character of the authority upon which the charge 
is made, is vouched for as respectable and authen- 
tic by the editor of ihe Courier and Enquirer, in 
whose paper it appears, and the House is called upon 
to defend its honor and dignity against the charge." 

Mr. Cilley addressed the House in opposition to 
the resolution. In the course of the debate he 
said " he sa.d he knew nuihing of this editor: but 
if it was the same editor who had onct made grave 
charges ag'ainst an insti.uiion of this country, and 
afterwards was said lo have received facilities to the 
amount of some i^5i2,000 fiom the same institution, 
an I gave it h s hearty support, he did not think his 
charge's were entitled to much cieuit in an Ameri- 
can Congress." These words, spoken by Mr. 
Cilley in debate, were strictly in order, were perti- 
nent to the subject under discussion, and "did not 
exceed the bounds and limits of his place and 
duty;" and though ihey implied a doubt inconsis- 
tent with unblemished honor and character in 
the person alluded lo, yet Mr. Cilley was justified 
in the use of them, by a report of a committee ef 
the Plou^e of Representatives, appointed on the 
14th of March, 1832, to inspect the books and ex- 
amine inio the proceedings of the Bank of the 
Uniitd Slates. An extract from the report, made 
by the majority of the committee, and published 
by order of the House of Representatives, is here- 
unto atmexed, in which it is staled, that " I'or six- 
teen months" the New York Courier and Enquirer 
" was warmly opposed" to the Bank of the United 
Stales; that on the 26th of March, 1831, and with- 
in le>s than nine months thereafter, the bank made 
three loans, amounting "t(j the sum df §52,975, 
which consisted of notes drawn and endorsed by 
the editors only;" and that "on or about rhe 8th 
of April, 1831, it (the paper) changed its coursa 
in favor of the bank." 

It was in refereuce to the facts contained in this 



%tt 



C5U.r 



report, a-'d piiblished to the worltl by ordrr of the 
House of Representatives, tlvat Mr. Cilley spoke 
the words, which had been already recited; and for 
thus alluding to facts put forth in the published 
documents of the body of which he was a member, 
he was called in question by the editor of the New 
York Courier and Enquirer. James Wa'snn 
Webb, on the 21st of February last, addressed a 
note to him, reciting those words, apprizins^ him 
that the writer of it was ihe editor of ihaijpaper, 
and concluding with a demand of explanation, 
couched in very explicit terms. 

GaDS!5Y'S HoTKt,, 

Washington, February 21, lSo8. 
Sir: In the Washingfon Globe of the 12ih in- 
stant, you are reported to have said, in the course 
of the debate which took place in the House of Re- 
presentatives on that day, growing out of a publi- 
cation made in the New York Courier and En- 
quirer — "He (you) knew nothing of this editor; 
but if it was the same editor who had once made 
grave charges against an institution of thi^ country, 
and afterwards was said to have received facilities 
to the amount of some ^52,000 from the same in- 
stitution, and gave it his hearty support, he did not 
think his charsies were entitled to much credit in an 
American Congress." 

I deem it my dnty to apprize you, sir, that I am 
the editor of the paper in which the letter from the 
"Spy in Washington," charging a member of Con- 
gress with corruption, was first published; and the 
object of this comnumication is to inquire of you 
whether I am the editor to whom you alluded, and, 
if so, to ask the explanation which the chaiacter 
of your remarks renders necessary. 
Very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 

J. WATSON WEBB. 
To the Hon. Jonathan Cilley. 

This demand of explanation, under the circum- 
stances which existed, was not susceptible of mis- 
interpretation, and, ihe sequel proves, wa.'; not mis- 
understood. Mr. Graves was the bearer of this 
note, having read it, and being fully apprized of its 
contents, and tendered it to Mr. Cilley, in the hall 
of the House of Representatives, while the House 
was in session. Mr. Cilley declined to receive it, 
and thereupon a brief correspondence ensued, 
which terminated in the challenge and death of 
Mr. Cilley by the bearer of this note. The first 
note of Mr. Graves was delivered by himself to 
Mr. Cilley, on the same day on which he bore the 
note of VVebb, that is, on Wednesday, the 2 1st of 
February, 1833, and should have borne that date. 
It is as follows: 

House of Representatives, 

February 20, 1838. 
In the interview which I had with you this morn- 
ing, when you declined receiving from me the note 
of Colonel J. W. Webb, asking whether you were 
correctly reported in the Globe in what you are 
there represented lo have said of him in this 
House, on the 12th instant, you will please say 
whether you did not remark, in substance, that in 
declining to receive the note, you hoped I would 
' not consider it, in any respect, disrespectful to me; 
and that the ground on which you rested your de^ 



difficulties with conductors of public journals, for 
what you might think proper to say in debate upon 
this floor, in discharge of your duties as a repre- 
sen ative of the people; and that you did not rest 
your objection, in our interview, upon any personal 
objeclions to Colonel Webb as a gentleman. 
Very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 

W. J. GRAVES. 
Hon. Jonathan Cilley. 

It will 'be frtjserve 1 that the note wliich Mr. 
Graves b.ire, is described by him as the note of 
Colonel J. W. Webb, askinx whether Mr. Cilley 
icas correctlii rc^cvted in ike Globe, in xohat he teas 
there represented to have said in the Howtc of Represen- 
tatives, on the I2lh instant. But it will be perceived 
ih;it Ihe note itself, though it is thus described by 
Mr. Graves whenever he speaks of it afterwards, 
does not contain that inquinj. 

Mr. Cilley, on the same day, personally delivered 
to Mr. Graves the following note in reply: 

' House op Representatives, 

February 21, 1838. 

The noLte which you just placed in my hands has 
been received. In reply, I have to state that in 
your interview with me this morning, when you 
proposeil to deliver a ^communication from Colonel 
Webb, of the New York Courier and Enquirer, I 
declined to receive it, because I chose to be drawn 
into no controversy with him. 1 neither affirmed or 
denied'any thing in regard to his character; but 
when you remarked that this course on my part 
might place you in an unpleasant situation,! slated 
to you, and now repeat, that I intended, by the re- 
fusal, no disrespect to you. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

JONA. CILLEY. 
Hon. W. J. Graves. 

On Thursday, the day following, Mr. Graves sent 
his second note to Mr. Cilley, which was delivered 
to him in his seat, during the session of the House, 
by Mr. Menefee, of Kentucky, the latter accompa- 
nying its delivery with an expression of the hope 
diat Mr. Cilley would perceive the propriety of re- 
lieving Mr. Graves from a position which was pain- 
ful to him. Mr. Cilley remarked that the note 
should be attended to. It is as follows: 

House of Representatives, 

February 22, 1838. 

Sir. Your note of yesterday, in reply to mine of 
that date, is inexplicit, unsatisfactory, and insuffi- 
cient. Among other things in this, that, in your 
declining lo receive Colonel Webb's communica- 
tion, it does not disclaim any exception to him per- 
sonally as a gentleman. I have, therefore, to in- 
quire lohether you dec!ined to receive his communica' 
tion on the ground of any personal exception to him «s 
a gentleman or a man of honor? A categorical 
answer is expected. 

Very respectfully, 

WM. J. GRAVES. 
Hon. J. Cilley. 

Mr. Cilley, on the same day, returned the follow- 
ing reply, by Mr. Duncan, of Ohio: 

House of Representatives, 
j February 22, 1838. 

I Sir: Your note of this date has just been placed 



clining to receive the note was distinctly this: That| in my hands. I regret that mine of yesterday was 
you could not consent to get yourself into personal' unsatisfactory to you; but I cannot admit the right 



5i 



K 
<i-." 



*^ on your pail to propound the question to which you to me this evening', though unusual and objection- 

al)!e, are accepted; with the understanding that the 
riiks are to be loaiied witli a biiigle ball, and that 
neither party is lo rai«c his weapon from tlie down- 
ward horizontal position until ihe word "fire." 

I will inform you, sir, by the hour of 11 o'clock, 

a. in. to-morrow, v helhsr Mr. Graves has been able 

lo procure a rifle, and, consequently, wliether he 

will requre a postponement of the lime of meeting. 

Your verv obedient servani, 

HEiN'UY A. WISE. 






ask a categorical answer, andihereforo decline any 
further re.-ponse to it. 

Vciy respecfullv, 

Hon. W. Graves. JOJSA. CILLEY. 

On Friday, the 23d of FebruAryy^Mr. Wise pre- 
sented to Mr. Ci'ley, at his boarding house, a few 
minutes before 1:2 o'clock, m. a challenge fiom Mr. 
Graves. 

Wasiii.vcton Citv, Feb. 23, 1833. 

As you have dt.'clined accepting a coniinunica' 



lion which I bore to you from Colonel Webb, and Hon. Geo. W. Jones. 



as by your note of yesterday you have refused to 
decline on grounds which would exonerate me 
from all responsibility growing:; out of the affair, I 
am left no other alternative but to ask that satis- 
faction which is reco;jiiised among gentlemen. My 



About 8 o'clock, a. m. on the 2401, Mr. Jones 
left at Mr. Wise's room the foUuwmg note, to wit: 
Washington City, D. C. 

February 24, 1833. 
Sir: I will receive, at Doctor Ileilly's, on F iireet, 



friend, Hon. Ileniy A.Wise, is authorized by me to ! any communication you may see proper to make 
make the arrangements suitable to the occasion. ! me, until 11 o'clock, a. m. to-day. 



Your obedient servant, 

WM. J. GRAVES. 
Hon. J. GiLLF.y. 

On the evenmg of the same day, about the hour 
of 5 o'clock, p. m. Mr. Jones, the delegate from 
Wisconsin, delivered to Mr. Graves, in the room 



Ilespecll'ully, vour obedient servant, 

GEO. W. JOiNES. 
Hon. H. A. Wise. 

Dr. Reilly's, F street, 
February 24, IP.'SS, 10 o'clock, a. in. 
Sir: I have called at this place, in conformity 



of Mr. Wise, and in his presence, an acceptance j with your note of this morning, to inform you that 



of the challenge: 

Washington Citt, Feb. 23, 1833. 

Your note of this morning has been received. 
My friend, Gen. Jones, will " make the arrange- 
ments suitable to the occasion." 

Your obedient servant, 
Hon. W. J. Gravi s. JONA. CILLEY. 

Mr. Jones immediately submitted the lol'ovving 
propositions to Mr. Wise : 

Washington, February 23, 1838. 

Sir: Mr. Cilley prop ses to meet Mr. Graves, 
at such place as may be agreed upon between us, 
to-morrow, at 12 o'clock, m. The weapons to be 
used on the occasion shall be rifles ; the partici^ 
placed fide to side at 80 yards distance from each 
other ; to hold the r lies horizontally al arm's 



Mr. Graves has not as yet been able to procure a 
I rifle and put it in order, .••nd cannot be ready by 12 
; o'clock, m. to-day. He is desirous, however, to 
ihave the meeting to-day, if possible, and I will in- 
I form you by half-past 12 o'clock, m. to-day, what 
! time to procure and prepare a weapon he will 
j require. 
j Very respectfully, ttc. 

HEiNRYA. WISE. 
Hon. George W. Jones. 

Afterwards, Mr. Jones left at Mr. Wise's room 
the following note, lo wit: 

Washington, lOi, a. m. 

February 24, 1838. 
I Your note, dated at 10 o'clock to-day, is received. 
In replv, I have the pleasure to inform you that 



length, downwards ; the rifles to be cocked, and j I have in my possession an excellent rifle, in good 
triggers set; the words to be, " Gentlemen, are | order, which is at the service of Mr. Graves. 

Very respecllully, &c. 

GEORGE W.JONES. 
Hon. H. A. Wise. 

Alterwards, Mr. J^nes sent to Mr. Wise's room 
the following note, to wit: 

WASrilNGTON, 

February 24, 1838, 11, a. m. 
Sin: Through the politeness of my friend. Doctor 
Duncan, i now lender to you, for the use of Mr. 



you ready?" After which, neither answering 
" No," the words shall be, in regular succesiion, 
" Fire — one, two, three, four." Neither party 
shall fire before the word " fire," nor after the 
word " four." The positions of the parties at the 
tnds of the line to be determined by lot. The 
second of the party losing the position shall 
have the giving of the word. The dress to be ordi- 
nary winter clothing, and ^ubj^•cl to the exaniina 



lion of both parties. Each party may have on the [ Gravis, the rifle referred to in my note of lOi.a. m 

ground, besides his second, a surgeon, and two ; ihis morning. 

other friends. The seconds, for execution of ih.ir ; Respectfully, your obedieni^servant, 

respective trusts, are allowed to have a paired'; GEORGE \V. JON Eb. 

pistols each on ihe ground, but no other person ^ Hon. H. A. Wisk. 

shall have any weapon. Tiie riflM to be loaded in | And with ihis note a rifle and powder-flask, aaJ 

the presence of the seconds. Should Mr. Graves balls, were lefiat Mr. Wise's room. 

not be able to procure a rifle by ihe time piescribed,! The rifle w<>s procured by Mr. Jones, and sent 



lime shrill be allowed for ihat purpose 

Your very obedient servant, 

GEO. W. JONES. 
Hon. Henry A. Wise. 

About 9 o'clock, p. m. Mr. Wise replied: 

Washington, February 23, 183S. 
Sir: The terms airangiuir the meeting between 



by him to Mr. W ise, in accoi dance with a previous 
request of Mr. Wise, or in consequence of a con- 
versation between Iheni. Mr. Jones says it was 
imtrict accordance with the rcqiusJ of Mr. Wise: 
and Mr. Wise says he had a conversation with Mr. 
Jones upon ihe subject, requested Mr. Jones to in- 
form him where one could be obtaineel, and has no 



Mr. Graves and Mr. CiUey, which you presented ' doubl that it was in cousequence of this converse- 




tion that Mr. Jones sent the rifle, and that he acted 
with 'he best motive in sending it. 

Mr. Wise having received ihe last note, called 
on Mr. Jones, and informed him that Mr. Graves 
had procured another rifle, and would be ready 
for the meeting at 3 o'clock, p. m. The parties 
met by arrangement on the road to Marlborou-h, 
m Maryland. Mr. Ciiley was accompanied by his 
second, Mr. Jones, by Mr. Bvnum of North Caro- 
Ima, and Col. James W. "Schanmburg, as his 
friends, and by Dr. Duncan of Ohio, as his sur- 
geon. Mr. Graves wasattendedbyMr. Wisc,as his 
second, by Mr. Crittenden, Senator from Ken- 
tucky, and Mr, Menefee of Kentucky, as his 
friends, and by Dr. Follz, of this city, as his sur- 
geon; and all procedded thence about 2 o'clock, 
p. m. to the place of meeting. Mr. Jones and Mr. 
Wise immediately marked off the ground. The 
line of fire was at right angles with the rays 
of the sun. The choice of positions fell by 
lot to Mr. Wise, and Mr. Jones had the 
giving of the word. Mr. Wise chose the posi- 
tion at the northwesterly end of the line. The 
distance was about ninelv-two yard^. There 
was a strong wind falling on the line of fire at an 
angle of about 45° against Mr. Ciiley. The posi- 
tion of Mr. Graves was near a wood, partly shel- 
tered by it, and that of Mr. Ciiley was on higher 
ground, and in the open field. The calibre of Mr. 
Graves's rifle was nearly twice as large as that of 
Mr. Cilley's, and would receive a ball of about 
eighty to the pound; while the rifle of Mr. Ciiley 
would receive a ball of about one hundred and 
thirty-two to the pound. Mr. Calhoon and Mr. ' 
Hawes, both members of the House from Ken- 
tucky, were at some distance off" as spectators. , 
Mr. Wise had two rifles on the ground, one of 
which, not being loaded, remained, by consent in i 
one of the carriages. The ha -k drivers were on 
the ground; and two other persons, (Grafton ' 
Powell and James F. Brown,) were present, with- j 
out the consent of either parly or their friends. ' 
Shortly after 3 o'clock, p. m. the parties exchansed 
shots, according to the terms of meeting. Mr.! 
Ciiley fired first, before he had fully elevated his 
piece; and Mr. Graves fired one or two seconds! 
afterwards. Both mis-sed. Mr. Graves cr<uld not 
have reserved his fire, had he been disposed to 
do so. I 

The friends assembled at the request of Mr. 
Wise, and Mr. Jones inquired of Mr. Wise 
whether his friend [Mr. Grave.-] was satisfied? Mr. ' 
Wise immediately said: "Mr. Jones, these gentle- 
men have come here without animosiiv to wards j 
each other; they are fighting merely upon a point i 
of honor; cannot IMr. Ciiley assign some reason fr.r 
not receiving at Mr. Graves's hands Col. Webb's 
communication, or make some disclaimer which 
will relieve Mr. Graves from his position?" Mr 
Jones replied; "While Ihe challenge is impentlms^ 
Mr. Ciiley can make no explanations." Mr. Wise 
said: "The exchange of shots su>pends the chal- 
lenge, and the challenge is suspended for explana- 
tion." Mr. Jones, thereupon, went to Mr. Ciiley 
and returned; and at'ier a few words in regard to 
putting in writing what had been and might be 
said, Mr. Jones proceeded tosav: "I am authorized 
by my friend, Mr. Ciliey, lo sav, that in declining 
to receive the note from Mr. Graves, purporting 



to be from Colonel Webb, he meant no disrespect to 
Mr. Graves, because he enteriainrd for him then, 
as he now does, the highest respect and the most 
kind feelings; but that he declined to receive the 
note, because he < hose not to be drawn into any 
controversy with Colonel Webb," or, "he refuses 
to discl.Tim disrespect for Colonel Webb, because 
he does not choose to be drawn into an expression 
of opinion as to him." Both expressions were 
used in the course of the conversaiion. Af- 
ter a consuliation on each side, Mr. Wise 
said to Mr. Jones, "This answer leaves Mr. GravffS 
precisely in the position in which he stood when 
the C'lallenge was sent." From an examination 
of the evidence, it will I e perceived that, although 
the language made use of by the persons present, 
in narrating what passed on this occasion, is not 
the same, there is yet no substantial difl^erence 
between them. Mr. Ciiley re-asserted the ground 
which he had assumed in the correspondence; that 
he declined to receive the note of Webb, because 
he chose to be drawn into no controversy with 
him; that he refused to disclaim any personal ex- 
ception to Webb as a gentleman or man of honor, 
because he would neither attirm nor deny any 
thing in regard to his character; and that in de- 
I dining to receive the demand of explanation, he 
I had inten ded no disrespect lo Mr. Graves. Mr. 
Ciliey even went farther, and declared th;t he en- 
tertained for him the highest respect and the most 
kind feelings. The position of Graves was, there- 
fore, not changed, except >o far as the peril of life 
b.' Mr. Ciiley in defence of his own position, and 
the subsequent voluntary avowal of the highest re- 
spect and the most kind feelings for the individual 
who had put him in jeopardy, may be supposed to 
have changed it. 

Mr. Crinenden says, that it was now "urged on 
the part of Mr. Graves that Mr. Ciiley ought to 
make some such explanation or declaration as had 
been proposed, for the satisfaction of Mr. Graves; 
while on the part of Mr. Ciliey it was urged that 
Mr. Graves ought to be satisfied with the exchange 
of shots, without any such explanation or declara- 
tion." All the friends of Mr. Ciiley urged that 
Mr. Graves should now be satisfied, and that the 
aflair .should now terminate, without requiring 
from Mr. Ciiley any farther concession beyond 
what he had already maiie. Docior Foltz said he 
"ihousht the afl'air should end here; that there was 
no personal ill feelings between the parties; that 
they had both proved themselves men of honor and 
courngf; and that Mr. Cilley's opinion of Colonel 
Webb con Id not be changed by the further exchange 
of shots or the receipt of wounds." Mr. Critten- 
den was understood, by nearly all present, to con- 
cur in these views, though it seems he did not in- 
tend so to be understood, but acquiesced with Mr. 
Wise and Mr. Menefee in insisting that th^. fight 
should go on, unless Mr. Ciiley would make the 
concession which had been demanded. Accord- 
ingly the challenge was renewed, the parties re- 
sumed their positions, and again exchanged shots 
in the manner prescribed by the terms of meeting. 
Mr. Graves fired first, before he had fully eleva- 
ted his piece; Mr. Ciiley fired about two .seconds 
afterwards. They both mi.ssed. Mr. Ciiley could 
not have reserved his fire had he been disposed lo 
do so. Mr. Jones, Mr. Bynum, Mr. Schaum- 



bnro;, Doctor Poltz, Mr. AViae, anti Mr. Fuller, 
tliouglit, from the motions and appearance of Mr. 
Graves, that he was hit. He at once said, "I 
must have another shot." Mr. Wise says, "he 

ositively, peremptorily, and repeatedly insisted 

pon another shot." 

The s'conds and friends agnin assembled, and 
the ch.ilienofe was asain withdrawn. Mr. Jones 
said, "Mr. Wise, my Iriend, in coming to the ground 
and exchanging shots with Mr. Graves, has shown 
to the world that, in declining to receive the note 
of Colonel Webb, he did not do so because lie 
dreaded a controversy. He has shown himself a 
brave man, and disposed to render satisfaction to 
Mr. Graves. I do think that he has done so, ami 
that the matter should entl here." Mr. Wise re- 
plied, in substance: "Mr. Jones, Mr. Cilley basal- 
ready expressed his respect for Mr. Graves, in the 
xcritteii cerrcspoiidence, and Mr. Graves does not re- 
quire of Mr. Cilley a certificate of character for 
Colonel Webb; he considers himself bound not 
only to preserve the respect due to himself, but to 
defend the honor of his friend, Colonel Webb.' 
Mr. Graves only insists that he has not borne the 
note of a man who is not a man of honor and not 
a gentleman." The challenge was again renewed, 
and while the friends were loading the rifles, Mr. 
Wise and Mr. Jones walked apart, and Mr. Wise 
asked Mr. Jones "if Mr. Cilley could not assign 
the rea.son for declining to receive the note of Col. 
Webb, that he [Mr. Cilley] did not hold himself 
accountalile to Colonel Webb for words spoken in 
debate?" Mr. Jones replied, that "Mr. Cilley would 
not assign that reason, because he did not wish to 
b? understood as expressing the opinion whether he 
v.Tis or was not accountable for words spoken in 
debate." Mr. Wise then asked Mr. Jones whether 



pr 



'Mr. Cdley would not say that, in declining to 
fceive the note of Colonel Webb, he meant no 
■sre^pect to Mr. Graves, either directly or indl- 
■ectl\,V'' To which Mr. J'ones replied affirmative- 
ly, adding, "Mr. Cilley entertains the highest re- 
spect for Mr. Graves, but declined to receive the 
te because he chose to be drawn into no contro- 
r-^y with Colonel Webb." Mr. Jones says that 
Mr. Wi.se took no exception to this answer, but 
linued to require other concessions, as stated, 
to be made. Mr. Wise says that in making that 
position he went beyond his instructions; and 
that the propsition and the response to it were not 
coininunicated to Mr. Graves, but were commu- 
icated both to Mr. Crittenden and to Mr. Menefce. 
Mr. Crittenden says he dues not remember to have 
card them, nor to have heard of 'them, during the 
gre':sof the contest, and that he docs nut remem- 
er to have given any advice or opinion upon 
them. Mr. Menifee remembers the proposition 
nd reply, and positively or by acquiescence gave 
he advice that the reply, thus qvaliJleA, was but a 
eiteration, in substace, of the orisinril ground as- 
umed by Mr. Cilley, and held to be inadmissible 
Mr. Graves. Mr. Wise had in his pos.session, 
the ground, three written propositions, neither 
f which was exhibited, nor their substance sub- 
i:ted, in any other manner than as before stated. 
Mr. Jones, Mr. Bvnum, Mr. Schaumburg, Dr. j 
uncan, and Dr. Foltz, now objected, in the 



Di 



and that Mr. Graves should declare himself satis- 
fied. Mr. CrittcndcH was understood azain, by 
nearly all present, to concur in the.-^e views; but it 
appears, from his ie>:timony, that he acquiesced in 
the views of Mr. Wise and Mr. Menelce. They 
insisted that the fight should go on, unless Mr. Cil- 
ley would make the concessions which were de- 
manded; either a direct disclaimer of any personal 
exception to James Watson Webb, as a gentleman 
and a man of honor, in declining to receive nis 
note, or an indirect disclaimer, by placing the re- 
fusal to receive it upon the ground of privilege; 
both of which Mr. Cilley, in the correspondence 
and throughout the affair upon the field, had re- 
fused to do, and, persisting in it, had twice re- 
ceived the fire of his antagonist. 

Immediately previous to the last exchange of 
shots, Mr. Wise said to Mr. Jones, " If this matter 
is not terminated this shot, and is not settled, I will 
propose to shorten the distance." To which Mr. 
Jones replied, " After this shot, without effect, I 
will entertain the proposition." Mr. Graves had di- 
rected Mr. Wise, if they missed repeatedly, to pre- 
vent a prolongation of the affair by proposing 
closer quarters; in consequence of which, Mr. Wise 
made the proposition, which would have aggrava- 
ted the severity of the terms. The rifles being 
loaded, the parties resumed their stations, and fired 
the third time, very nearly together. Mr. Cilley 
was shot through the body. He diopped his rifle, 
beckoned to one near him, and said to him, " I am 
.shot," put both his hands to his wound, fell, and in 
two or three minutes expired. 

Early in the day on which he fell, an agreement 
was entered into between James Wat-on Webb, 
Daniel Jackson, and William H. Morell, to 
arm themselves, repair to the room of Mr. Cille}', 
and force him to fight Webb with pistols on the 
spot, or to pledge his word of honor to give Webb 
a meeting before Mr. Graves; and, if Mr. Cilley 
would do neither, to shatter his right arm. They 
accordingly took measures to ascertain whether Mr. 
Cilley was at his lodgings; and finding that he was 
not, they proceeded, well armed, to Bladensburg, 
where it wassaid the duel between Mr. Graves and 
Mr. Cilley was to take place. Before arriving there, 
it was agreed between Webb, Jackson, and Mo- 
rell, that Webb should approach Mr. Cilley, claim 
the quarrel, insist on fighting him, and assure him 
that if he aimed his rifle at Mr. Graves, he [Webb] 
would shoot him [Mr. Cilley] on the spot. It 
was supposed by them that Mr. Graves or Mr. 
Wise, or some of the party, would raise a weapon 
at Webb, whereupon it was agreed that Webb should 
instantly shoot Mr. Cilley, and that they .should then 
defend themselves in the best way they could. 
Not finding thf* parties at Bladensburg, they fol- 
lowed in pursuit to the old Magazine, and thence 
to the shore of the Potomac, near the arsenal, at 
Greenleal's Point, whence, it being after 3 o'c'ock, 
p. m. they returned to the city, to await the result. 
"It is unnecessary to add," say they, in a statement 
drawn up by Webb, signed by Jackson and Mo- 
rell, and published in the New York Courier and 
Enquirer, "what would have been the course of 
Col. Webb, if Mr. Graves, instead of Mr. Cilley, 
had been injured. Suflice it to say, that it was 



trongest language, asainst the further prosecution sanctioned by us; and however much we deplored 
f the contest, and insisted that it should now cease, • it, we could not doubt but the extraordinary posi- 



/) 



ion in which he would have been placed would I 
have warranted the couri-e determined upon." It 
is difficult to imagine what is here daikly sha- 
dowed forth, if it be not that, had Mr. Cilley sur- 
vived the encounter with Mr. Graves, and had the 
latter suffered in it, it would then have been the 
fate of Mr. Cilley to have encountered an assassin. 

Such were the material facts and circumstances 
which attended the deaih of Mr. Cilley. The 
committee, entertaining the opinion that the cause 
of the challenge was the cause of the death of Mr. 
Cilley, have sought for it where it shouJd be found 
in the most authentic form, in the correspondence 
of the parties. 

Mr. Cilley declined to receive the note of Mr. 
Webb, because he "chose to be drawn into no 
controversy with him." He placed his refusal to re- 
ceive a demand for explanation of the words spoken 
by him in debate solely on the ground of his own 
voluntary eleclion, without assigning any other 
reason. "He chose to be drawn into no contro- 
versy" with Webb. He declared, at the same 
time, that he neither affirmed nor denied any thing 
in regard to Webb's character, in decliiiing to re- 
ceive the note. He declared further, that he had 
before stated, and now repeated, that he intended 
by the refusal no disrespect to Mr. Graves, and 
that he had said this only in rep'y to a remark of 
Mr. Graves, that this course might place him in 
an unpleasant situation. 

Mr. Graves, in his second note, takes but one 
exception to this first note of Mr. Cilley. " It does 
not disclaim any exception to him (Webb) per- 
sonally as a gentleman." He says : " Your note 
of yesterday, in reply to mine of that date, is inex- 
plicit, unsatisfactory, and insufficient; amonu other 
things in this — that, in your declining to receive 
Colonel Webb's communication, it does not dis- 
claim any exception to him, personally, as a gen- 
tleman." " I have, therefore," he adds, " to 
inquire whether you declined to receive his com- 
munication on the ground of any personal excep- 
tion to him as a gentleman or a man of honor? 
A categorical answer is expected." 

Mr. Cilley, in his second note, regrets that his 
first was nu'-aiisfactory, but cannot admit the right 
of Mr. Graves to propound the question, and, 
therefore, he declines any further response to it. 

It is difficult to conceive that Mr. Graves, upon 
this correspondence of Mr. Cilley, could have 
challenged him for inlendim disrespect to Mr. 
Graves ; for any such intention was positively dis- 
claimed, and, as appears, in a most unexception- 
able and courteous manner, in reply to a suggf^siion 
of his own, which called for it ; or for ajjirmins^ or 
denying any thing in regard lo the characttr of Wtbb, 
in declining to receive his note ; for any such 
affirmation or denial is also disclaimed, in equally 
positive terms. Mr. Cilley had declined to receive 
a call from James Watson Webb, for explana- 
tion of words spoken in debate in the House of R.e- 
presenlatives, and had put his refusal solely on the 
ground ihat he chose to be drawn into no controver- 
sy with him; but he is pressed further, and interro- 
gatpd beyond this limit, which he had assigned tn 
himself, and a categorical answer is demanded to 
the question whether he declined on the ground of 
any personal exception to Webb as a geMleman or 
a man of honor. He denies the ri^ht to mieiro- 



gate him in this manner for declining a call, which 
his right, and duty, as a member of the House of 
llepresentatives, and the just maintenance of the 
privileges of that body, requiredhim to decline; and, 
denying the right to interrogate, he, therefore, re- 
fused to submit to answer any further. And it was 
because he refused to receive the note, and refused 
to answer any further, that he was challenged by 
another member of the same body. 

This matter is not left open to inference or argu- 
ment. The cause of the challenge appears in a 
manner which precludes all doubt. Iiisstill furtber 
specified and avowed by Mr. Graves himself, in his 
own note, which contains the challenge. It is 
staled clearl}', unequivocally, and with the utmost 
precision, and is assigned expressly, and in form, 
as the cause for which the challenge is given. "^3 
you have declined accejiiing a tommun'icaiivn which 
I bore to you from Colonel IVebb, and as by 
your uote of yesterday you have refused to decline 
on grounds which would tx<nerate me from all 
responsibility growiiig out of the affair, J am 
left no other aliemaiive but to ask that satisfac- 
tion which is recognis d among gentlemen." Mr. 
Cilley, by his "note of yesterday,'" had refused 
to answer the question to which a ^'categorical 
answer'''' had been demanded: that is losay, "ic/iei/((?r 
he declined to receive Colonel Webb's coinmunica- 
t'lon on the ground of any personal excepd'ton to 
him as a gentleman or man of honor. ''^ The ground 
of challenge, therefore, is, by Mr. Graves him- - 
self, expressly stated to br, that Mr. Cilley -tte- 
clined to receive the communicaiion from fVtbb, and, 
by his note of February 20;!, refused to ansioer that 
question, touching the honor of Webb. This was the 
open and avowed cause, set forth and presented to' 
Mr. Cilley, by which he was guided, and upon 
which he acttd, in a matter involving the utmost* 
extremity of human responsibility. For this cause, 
and for this alone, he was challenged and fell by 
the hand of Mr. Graves; unless it be admissible to 
believe that, after all verljal communication had 
ceased between him and his antagonist, and the 
difference had assumed the form exclusively of a 
written correspondence between them, he was 
challenged and fell for a cau-se not set up in that 
correspondence, not put forth as a ground of 
complaint, not made known to him or his friends 
as a matter of grievance, and in regard to which, 
therefore, it may be believed, he was profoundly 
ignorant, and had no opportunity alTorded him in 
anv way of voluntary satisfaction or explanation. 

Nor is there any thing in what subsequently 
occurred, as disclosed by the joint statement of 
the seconds, or the testimony of any wi'niss, 
uhich gives color to a suggestion, that there 
was, at any time afterwards, a change of the 
ground of controversy. 

No communicaiion whatever, upon the subject 
of difference, took place between the principalv, 
their respective seconds, or friends, after the chal- 
lenge was given, before the first exchange of shots. 
Of course, no change of the ground of contro- 
versy could have occurred until afier Mr. Cilley 
had receivid the fire of his antagonist, and had ha- 
zarded his life in defence of the position which he 
had assumed in the correspondence. After the first 
exchange of shots, as already shown, Mr. Cilley 
re-asseried his original position, and Mr. Wise in- 



sisted that what was then said by Mr. Jones only 
placed " the affair upon the oiiginal j^rouiid?," and 
lelt "Mr. Graves precisely in the position in which 
he stood when the challenge was sent." There 
was, in fact, no change whatever in the position ol' 
the parties, except what arose IVoin the circum- 
stance that Mr. Cilley had given Mr. Graves the 
satisfaction demanded of an exchange of shots, and 
from the further circumstance that Mr. Cilley not 
only repeated the disclaimer that he had meant no 
disrespect to Mr. Graves, but positively avowed, 
also, that he entertaineil for him the higheit respect 
and the most kind feelings. 

In this state of the controversy the challenge is 
renewed, and Mr. Cilley again puts his life in 
jeopardy. Tiie challenge being once more sus- 
pended, he again insists upon his original position, 
thai he had declined to rective the demand for explana- 
tion of the rcords spoken by him in debate, because he 
chose to be drawn into no controversy loilh Webb, and 
that he loonld assign no other reason; and while, on 
the other hand, it was insisted for Mr. Graves that 
he considered himself bound not only to preserve 
the respect due to himself, but to defend the honor 
of his friend. Col. Webb, and that he only insisted 
'Hhat he had not borne the note of a man who was not a 
man of honor and not a gentleman,^^ Mr. Cilley re- 
plied aflirmatively to a proposition submitted on the 
part of Mr. Graves, that in declining to receive the 
note, he meant no disrespect to J\Ir. Graves, either di- 
rectly or indirectly; and declared that he entertain- 
ed the highest respect for him, but declined to re- 
ceive the note, because he chose to be drawn into 
no controversy with Col. Webb. He excluded, 
in direct and positive terms, every possibility uf 
disrespect to Mr. Graves, directly or indi- 
rectly, and in effect only insisted on his right 
to decline a demand for explanation of words 
spoken in debate, because he ctt()se to be 
drawn into no controversy upon the sub- 
— ' ject, without assigning any other reason. But 
he was interrogated for another reason, and an- 
other reason was d manded; and for resisting that 
demand the challenge was again renewed, and he 
fell a victim in defence of what he conceived to be 
his rights as an individual, or as a representative 
of the people in the House of Representatives. 

The committee were disposed to pursue this in- 
quiry in every form. Not content with tracing the 
cause of the challenge in the written correspon- 
dence, in the assignment of reasons for the chal- 
lenge under Mr. Graves's own hand, and in the 
various propositions which were submitted on the 
field, from the beginning to the end of the contest, 
they proceeded to put to every witness who was 
believed to know any thing upon the subject, the 
direct inquiry, whether "Mr. Graves or his second, 
at any time before Mr. Cilley fell, comn*unicaled 
to Mr. Cilley, his second, or attendant friends, that 
a question of veracity between Mr. Graves and Mr. 
Cilley was a point of difficulty to be adjusted?" 
Mr. Jones answered, "Certainly not to me, nor to 
Mr. Cilley, at any time, to my knowledge, either 
before or during the day the duel was fought. I 
did not hear of the existence of such a question un- 
til the Sunday or Monday after Mr. Cilley was 
killed. The written correspondence between Mr. 
Graves and Mr. Cilley does not show the existence 



^ 



of any such qnestion of veracity" Mr. Bynum 
answered, "1 heard no such communication, di- 
rectly or indirectly, from cither Mr. Graves or 
his second, made or imimaled to Mr. Cilley or 
any of his friends, before ha fell." Mr. Schaum- 
burg answered, "1 did not understand that iheie 
was a ^question of veracity^ between the parties, 
nor was there any conversation on the subject." 
Dr. Duncan answered, "They never did to 
my knowledge. I never heard the ques- 
tion of veracity assigned, during Mr. Cilley's 
life, as the cause of any difficulty." Mr. Pierce 
answered, "I never held any conversation with Mr. 
Graves, or 'his second or attendant I'riends,' in re- 
lation to the late fatal duel, nor did I ever hear, 
until subsequently to the 24ih of February la?t, 
'that any question of veracity between Mr. Graves 
and Mr. Cilley was a point of difficulty to be 
adjusted." Dr. Foltz answered, "They did not." 

Mr. Wise answereJ, "I do not Icnow what Mr. Graves may 
iKive CDmiiuinicateil lo Mr. Cilley at any lime Ijelbre lie loll, as to 
a queslioii ol' veracity betwetn ihem. I |jresu)iie tlicy both knew 
wlial hud [lassed between them verbally. I believe that I did 
stale to Mr. Joiies,or lo other friends ol Mr. Cilley, on the ground, 
iliat Mr.Graves said Mr. Cilley had assigned lo hiin ihe reason lor 
declining to receive the note of Col. Webb, thai he did not choose 
10 be held accountable for words spoken in debate. 1 think I so in- 
formed Mr. Jones when I asked him ifMr.Cilley could not assiga 
this reason on the ground; but of this lam not positive." Mr. 
Crittenden answeied, "Not that I know of. I know of no 
communication between any of these parties olher than aa 
before stated, so far as 1 now recollect. Whether those commu- 
nications involve any such question it is noilbr iiie lo decide; no 
such question was made, in terms, that I know ol." Mr. Menc- 
fee answered, " Mr. Graves had no communication of any kind 
with Mr. Cilley, his second, or attendant friends, and of course 
did not communicate to them that such a question was a point 
of i.ifficulty. Nor did the second of Mr. Graves, as far as I re- 
member, make such a communication, except so far as may be 
implied from the propositions made liyhim, in connection with 
the correspondence, &c One. at least, of tlie friends of Mr. 
Graves, in the presence of his second, made frequent attempts to 
direct the attention of the second and friends of Mr. Cilley to 
the dilliculiy which was presented by the terms of Mr. Graves's 
first note (giving his version of what Mr. Cilley had said) and 
the ground wiiich Mr. Cilley had subsequently assumed. But 
it was not referre.l lo, in lerms, as a question of veracity. 
It was believed that Mr. Cilley had honorable grounds, which 
would be satislactory to Mt. Graves, and at the same time 
compatible with the truth, which would effect the object, 
without making directly such a question whilst efibrts were 
pending to accommodate. Whether the views, thus express- 
ed, were communicated to Mr. Cilley, I know not. For the 
character of what occurred on this point, so far as I participa- 
ted in it, the committee are referred to my general statement." 

Mr. Graves said to Dr. Foltz, on the way lo the field, "That 
he had been the bearer of a note from Colonel Webb to Mr. 
Cilley, inquiring if Mr. Cilley had been correctly reported 
in the Globe. Mr. Cilley refused to receive the note, and 
declined giving his reasons, which implicated me, in conse- 
f/uence of which I challenged him, but I have no personal 
(uiimosity towards him." Mr. Wise said on the field, "Mr. 
•Jones, these gentlemen have come here without animosity to- 
wards eacli olher, they are fighting merely upon a point of 
tionor." "These men have nothing against each oilier; they 
are merely settling a point of honor." 

Tills concurrent testimony of all, without exception, taken in 
connection with the written correspondence, the various pro- 
positions and answers on the field, and the further fact that Mr. 
Cilley had not been informed that Mr. Graves had undertaken 
to repeat to others any verbal communication between them, 
or that any misapprehension or misunderstanding existed be- 
tween them on that subject, utterly repels the suggestion, that 
any (piestion of veracity hadaii.sen, or had been made, or was the 
cause of the challenge, or of the death of Mr. Cilley. Indeed, 
any misapprehension on that subject would liave given no more 
just ground of animosity, and least of all of the highly vindic- 
tive feelings necessarily aroused liy a question of veracity, than 
tlie very evident misapprehension which Mr. Graves labored 
under in regard to some parts of the note of James Watson 
Webb, of which he was the bearer. 

The commitlec will not, injustice lo Mr. Graves, harbor the 
belief, that there were rankling secretly in his bosom any vin- 
dictive or hostile feelings towards Mr. Cilley, growing out of 
any question of personal veracity, and prompting him to carry 



on a deadly warfare under anoiher pretext, net only without a 
directand explicit disclosure oftiie real cause of diffieully.sucti 
as would have left no misapprehension on the mind of any 
one, but under circumsiancts which misled the other party 
and his friends, and left him, under that false impression, to 
the forfwtof his life. 

The committee have, therefore, come to the conclufion, that 
tlie worth- spoken hy Mr. Cilley in debate in the Jirnise of 
Representatives, the refusal of Mr. CiUey to receive a de 
inaixd for explanation of those tcords, and his refusal to as 
sign any other reason for it, than that he chose to he drajvn 
into nu difficulty upon the subject, were the causes which led 
to the death of Mr. Cilley, under the circumstances which have 
been substantially detailed. 

It remains to inquire vihether there has been a breach of the 
privileges of the House. 

It is a breach of the highest constitutional privileges of the 
House, and of the most sacred rights of the people in the person 
of their representative, to demand, in a hostile manner, an ex- 
planation of woriLsspuken in debate; to be the bearer ol such a 
demand; to demand a reason for refusing to receive it, beyond 
the mere voluntary election of the member interrogated; or to 
demand, under any circumstances, any reason at all. No 
member can be ((uestioned in a hostile way, and put to his 
plea, and yield to It, without subjecting liimself to great disad- 
vantages in the estimation of many, and impairing his influ- 
ence and his usefulness as a member. It is a still more aggra 
vated breach of the privileges of the House, and of the rights of 
the people in the person of their representative, to challenge a 
member, and to slay him in combat, for refusing to comply 
with any such demand It is the liighesi ofl'ence which can be 
committed against either House of Congress; against the free- 
dom of speech and of debate therein; against the spirit and the 
substance of that constitutional provision, that for any speech 
or debate in either House, the members shall not be questioned 
in any other place, and violates essentially the right ofperleci 
immunity etsetchere for -words spoken in debate //ere, which is 
essential to the independence of Congress, and to the existence 
of constitutional hberty. And when tliis otTence is committed 
by a member, it calls for the exercise of the highest powers of 
the House to purge itself of the evil, to maintain effectually its 
rights and piivileges, and to perserve inviolate thisimmunity, 
which is guarantied by the Constitution, and not for the sake of 
tlie individual, but for his constituents and lor the country. 

Tlie present case is without any circumstance of extenuation. 
A member of the House, in a manner most strictly parliamen- 
tary, on an occasion most appropriate, in language most deco- 
rous and moderate, in defence of the honor of the House against 
an anonymous and unfounded charge of corruption, had alluded 
to the published records of Ibrmer proceedings with perfect 
truth and accuracy; had, in obedience to his duty, declined a 
hostile demand lor explanation in a manner in which the com- 
mittee can discover no cause of ofience; had, respectfully, with 
expressions of regret, declined to admit the right to interrogate 
him further; had disclaimed all disrespect, directly orinditcclly, 
towards his antagonist, and avowed for him the highest respect 
and the kindest I'eelings, and, after all this, avowed without hos- 
tility, and against the strongest protestations of others, he was 
required fatally to expose himself to the third discharge ol a 
rifle. On tlie other liand, Mr. Graves, a member of the House, 
voluntarily and unnecessarily became the bearer of a demand 
uponanotlier member in attendance, for explanation of words 
spoken in debate; he presented it in the House, while the House 
was in session; he demanded a reason for the refusal, be- 
yond the voluntary election of that member to be drawn 
into no difliculty upon the subject; which being with- 
held, he then challenged him in this| city, and slew him in 
this vicinuy, while Congress was in session. Every step of 
Mr. Graves in this progress, involved him deeper and dceiier 
in a breach of the privileges of the House, until their destruc- 
tion was consummated in the person of lilr. Cilley. The eye 
of reason can discover, in the whole course of Mr. Cilley, no 
otTence towards those who pursued him, except that given hy 
alluding to the records of Congress, in the faithful and upright 
discharge ol liis duty as a member, which, justly, could have 
given no oflence at all. Nor can his deaih be vindicated or 
excused by any circumstance whatsoever, not even by that cus- 
tom, the relic of unenlightened and barbarous ages, which was 
formerly supposed to be a proof of some degree of physical 
courage, but is, in fact, a signal monument of the want of the 
higher attribute of moral courage; which has, in these modern 
times, degenerated into a game of chances and a scramble for 
undue advantages; which can furnish no criterion lor truth 
justice, or honor, and deals out its inflictions of misery most 
severely upon the unofTending and the helpless; which is 
deeply deplored by all men, even those who submit to it, and is 
forbidden, in every stage of it, by all law, human and divme. 

It is not neces.-3ary, on the present occasion, to go into any 
consideration ol the general power ef the House to punish for 
breach of privilege; or to inquire into the origin and foundation 
oflhatpowerover contempts, which has beeo asserted by the 



Parliament of Great Britain, from time immemorial, by every 
legislative body, by every judicial tribunal, from the highest to 
the lowest, and, repeatedly, by one or the other House of Con- 
gress, and has been recognised as existing In the House of Re- 
presentatives by the Supreme Court of the United Slates. 
Whether it be a power necessary to the continued existence of 
ihe legislative body, or a power necessary to the free exercLse 
of its legislative lunctions, it is in either case a necessary pow- 
er, strictly granted by the Constitution, and as fully gianted as 
if it were literally expressed. Hut in the case ol nierabers, the 
Con.^titution has expressly granted ilie power to punish lor dis- 
orderly conduct; and has, aTso, expressly gianted the power, 
with the concurrence of two-thirds, to expel a member for anv 
cause which two-thirds of the Houpe may deem suflicienl. 

The comniitlee, therefore, viewing ihe breach of the rights 
and privileges of the House, on the part of Mr. Graves, to have 
been an offence of this high character, against the vital f.rinci- 
pic of a deliberative assembly and of representative Govern- 
ment, feel constrained, by a sense of duly, to present to the 
House a resolution that he be expelled therefrom. 

It has been decided by the House of Representatives, on a 
former occasion, that it was a breach of privilege to send a chal- 
lenge to a member in attendance, or to be the bearer of such 
challenge. And it is equally so to act as second to the chal- 
lenger. In the present instance it appears that Mr. Wise had 
no knowledge of the demand of exidanaiion which was borne by 
Mr. Graves, and had never seen that paper until after tlie fatal 
catastrophe. But bavins been early consulted by Mr. Graves 
u[)on the first letter of Mr. Cilley, and concurred with him in 
his views of it, he bore the challenge to Mr. Cilley, and he acted 
throughout as the second of the challenger, a.ivising and insisi- 
ing that the fight should go on, until Mr. Cilley fell. The com- 
mittee, therefore, deeming him deeply involved, under the cir- 
cumstances which this case presents, in a breach of tlie privi- 
leges of the House, report a resolution that he deserves tl.e deci- 
ded censure of the House, and that lie be censured accordingly. 
Mr. Jones had no knowledge of the afl^air until the determina- 
tion of Mr. Cilley had been formed as to the acceptance of the 
challenge, and the lime, mode, weapon, and other preliminaries 
of the meeting. But he was the bearer of the acceptance, and 
acted throughout as the second of the challenged party; and it in 
the opinion of the committee that he was thereby involved jn a 
breach of privilege, and that he be censured therefor. 

In regard to the persons, not principal nor .seconds, who were 
present on the field, and expressed theiropinionsat ihe request 
of the parties, without having advised, instigated, or procurerl 
the meeting, however they might be implicated in the courts oi 
law, the committee entertain doubts how far they would be in- 
volved in a breach of privilege; and, iindtr a strong conviction 
tlial the power of the House should be exercised, never in a 
doubtful case, alwayu with moderation, they content them- 
selves with presenting the facts and circumstances, so far as 
those persons are concerned, without proposing any action 
thereon. 

The committee entertain no doubt that James Watson Webb 
has been guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House; but 
they also concur unanimously in the opinion, tliat if there be 
any real ground to believe that a conspiracy to assassinate ac- 
tually existed, as set forth in ihat atiocious paper drawn up 
by him, signed by Daniel Jackson and William H. Morell, 
sworn to by the latter, and published in the New York Courier 
and Enquirer, he be left to the chastisement of the courts ol' 
law and of public opinion, and that the House will consult its 
ewn dignity and the public interests by bestowing upon him no 
further notice. 

Resolxcd, That William J. Graves, a member of this 
House from the State of Kentucky, in bearing to the late Jona- 
than Cilley, then a member of this House, the demand for 
explanation of words spoken in debate, demanding his reasons 
for declining to receive it, and challenging him, and engaging in 
a late duel with him, which terminated in his death, has been 
guilty of a breach of the privilege ef this House. 

And bt it further resolved. That the said W. J. G. for said 
breach of privilege be, and hereby is, expelled from ihi.'; 
House. 

Resolved, That Henrv A. Wise, in bearing a challenge to 
the late Jonathan Cilley, then a member of this House, 
and acting as a second to the challenger in the duel, whidi ter- 
minated in the death of Mr. Cilley, has been guilty of a 
breach of the privileges of this House, and that he deser ves tlie 
decided censure of this House, and hereby is censured accord- 
ingly. 

Resolved, That Geo. W. Jones, in acting as second to the 
challenged party, the late Jonathan Cilley, then a memi er 
of this House, in the duel which terminated in his death, hza 
been guilty of a breach of the privileges of this House, and 
that he be therefor, and hereby is, censured accordingly by 
this House. 



-^■- C^-: ■0..<5*^■ 
<ie: <^ 







































•.<sr ■ «z 






<:::<^C- , <:if ^ est. <E^^^, *^«tiP: ^ «ejt^ <^s^^im^B^<m^ 



tic ^.^C' <^' <2<- ^C 






•c<<«^3:?<: <mz ■ <>^ 



«t:tr€ <- 



^Z' •- 'Ci.5.t 

















. «c 


««c-< >: 


«C" 


d 


«C 


■^' 


«C 


;: .^r^ ' 


^c: 


--.^-■■'<C' 


«: 


"S^^is 


\ « 


^s--<i 


?v.«C 






.^.- — --tl. <t,<:^i^C:r. «: . 

«: «?• -cc: <£.''. V <£;: ^ . -air <f i <x: j^ 
<C'^ .; ct" ■ . V (SI, ^Kfc <c:. . ^. -^ 

c-c cc- > <'<5: «i.-<c. ' 

-:x. -cc ':^ <x: «c«:. ' 

4V. cc ■:<■ <r. ^-:c. 5= :!5^-^ 









<3iir'^^ 



'^CC C:C?:C d 



:' <£:C«r<r 






,:,2^ «•& 



- <aC: -^ 






m^,^ 






^'. c^c CL 


''■ < 


^il< <L 


C4, 


^ Vc^: 


< A- 






■'^-.v^ 


. «:' 




cc 


^■><fe 


cc 


<r. <i. 


^ ^ 


^ <:c 






<'^^ 


V^ 


r «: 


t^ 




^V 


c <«: 


^^ 


c' oc 


w 


c: «L 


^^ 


c «: 


^e 


<^ j2^ 


cl^ 


<: «cr 




:««r 


r <?>♦ < 


^. «c 


^^ C 


n at. 






c ^ ^S 






" c < 









<r<:f <2; 



c: c ^ 

4C: c c 









, i^««2?" «^ 5 »?*- 






CC * 



^:^^;^•^%4: 



or ' 



l^v 















% ^ ^ ^.^ 















C4C 

<£<r - 
cod 















'<2ls^ 


















flrr«^ 






LIBRARY OF 



CONGRESS 




011 836 715 7 




